1
[Seattle Times] 15 years after moving Sonics, now it’s the Thunder asking for publicly funded arena
(www.seattletimes.com)
this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)
NBA - Main
28 readers
1 users here now
Game analysis, highlights and everything else that is happening in the NBA.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I will never understand why public funds should pay for >50% of the funds for a privately owned sports clubs arena
Cause this is America and the country caters more towards the 1% than the 99%
Let’s be honest - it’s because they can. People lose their mind when sports teams leave. They have leverage
It’s also because no politician actually has the balls to do what is right.
Because the politicians get bonuses when they do these things.
Bill Simmons' best ever take is the "billionaire should pay for their own stadiums" take.
Sounds like those billionaires need to just lay off the avocado toast and fancy coffee, pull theirselves up by their bootstraps, and write that check.
Clearly they need to start shopping at Costco. 10 Avocados, 2 Loafs of Bread, and 248 Keurig K-Cups for like $17 after tax.
Because billionaires can ask and hold moving the team over the heads of the council and mayor. Making one of the reasons to own a sports team as "real estate scam."
Because the threat of leaving is a big one. Teams have a lot of leverage in these scenarios.
I mean, billionaires are very notably cheap sons of bitches
Is it much different than tax dollars being used to bail out privately owned companies?
Because they promise jobs, increased local business uptake, new and improved restaurant and consumer based infrastructure. You have to look outside the box of “tax loophole” and think about the trickle down economic effects of the publicly funded money. Taxpayers money is helping the area where the stadium will be built. Plus it’s a lot of jobs that can temporarily employ people during the construction. Then you have to feed those workers and those workers will slightly stimulate the local economy during that construction period.
Ahhh yes trickle down economics… time to piss on the peasants again
The best is the economic impact studies assume the only 2 options are 1) Taxpayer funded renovation or 2) Relocate the team
Completely ignores 3) Privately funded renovation and 4) Maintain currently perfectly fine facility
That's just it, they're not owned by the billionaires. Billionaires know what a pain in the ass owning commercial real estate is, so it's a lot easier and cheaper to be a tenant.
It’s a racket. They make all the money you pay for it. But it’s the same as big pharma with the vaccines. Publicly funded research, publicly funded free vaccines but the pharmaceutical companies made all the money
Well, usually the facility is used for more than the NBA. Concerts and other Events stimulte the economy and help local businesses and provide jobs. Not saying those billionaire owners need a break, but unless the venue is used by only the NBA team there should be joint cost. Sports and entertainment salaries are just bananas. Until players and movie stars command less money along with greedy owners/entertainment companies, it will only get more ridiculous. Watching sports/concerts/live events is quickly becoming impossible financially for anyone but the extremely wealthy.
Socialism for the rich only
I wrote my final paper in school on this. Even privately funded arenas cost cities and country 100s of millions in infrastructure improvements.
And before people argue about developments occurring around arenas, any economic development has been show to just be shifted from what would have happened in the city regardless. Building an arena just concentrates certain development around it without being additive